The "Rapture" has been back in the news again. It is now an old, tired, hoary chestnut--but every so often "Rapture dogma" gets to do another promenade around the public square. And so it has come to pass once again.
The folk we feel saddest about are those genuine, well-meaning believers who have been hoodwinked and misled by stupid speculations masquerading as the truth. These folk are generally committed to Christ and dedicated to obeying Him, come what may. They are prone to being captured by false teachers insofar as extreme demands, total loyalty, outlandish sacrifices are to be expected when one follows Jesus (or so they are taught). To such, the more extreme the demand, the more genuinely true it will appear.
To hear from Scripture that "no man knows the day or the hour" when Christ will return is less satisfying than a certain definitive claim that "He will return in the Final Advent at 3.02pm next Wednesday, so better give up everything to do with this life and live as a fanatic for the next five days." The latter claim has the the "authenticity" of being both extreme and dramatic, and therefore authentic--at least to gullible, poorly taught, relatively ignorant Christians. They are like sheep without a shepherd. And when there is no shepherd, rapine wolves can have a field day.
Rapture dogma came into vogue during the nineteenth century, first in the United Kingdom, then in the US.
It was part of a scheme of biblical interpretation known as Dispensationalism. Now it is reported that Dispensationalism is on the wane as its repeated predictions and prognostications repeatedly failed to materialize. Sooner or later, when that happens, scepticism and doubt--seriously scholarly doubt amongst Dispensational theologians--inevitably emerges. And so it has transpired. (We should add that serious Dispensational scholars never got into the pop-prophecy business that have allowed slick fraudsters to defraud and fool many. But they laid the groundwork.)
It is helpful to keep in mind that there is nothing new in periodic breakouts of Rapture mania. For example, in the mid-nineteenth century, Jerusalem was so "overrun by apocalyptic Americans that the American Journal of Insanity compared its hysteria to the California Gold Rush. When Herman Melville visited, he was fascinated yet repulsed by the 'contagion' of American Christian millenarianism--'this preposterous Jewmania', he called it, 'half-melancholy, half farcical.'" (Simon Sebag Montefiore, Jerusalem, the Biography p.338). American Christians went to Jerusalem, expecting that Jesus was about to return there. The mistaken idiocy has been around quite a while.
The "Rapture" refers to a passage in Luke 17 where Jesus is warning of the judgement about to fall upon Israel and Jerusalem--which did occur in AD 66-70. "I tell you, on that night thee will be two men in one bed; one will be taken, and the other will be left. There will be two women grinding at the same place; one will be taken, and the other will be left." (Luke 17: 34,35) The Rapturists believe the "one taken" is the true Christian believer who is raptured away to be with Christ; those left are consigned to their impending doom.
In fact, the reverse is the case as any reasonable reading of the text in context would make plain. A recent article in the Westminster Theological Journal makes it clear.
Benjamin L. Merkle, “Who Will Be Left Behind? Rethinking the Meaning of Matthew 24:40-41 and Luke 17:34-35,” WTJ 72 (2010): 169-79.Hat Tip: Justin Taylor
Here’s his thesis, in essence: “Although many assume that those taken in Matt 24:40-41 and Luke 17:34-35 are taken to be with Jesus and those left behind are left for judgment, this interpretation should be rejected.”
His conclusion summarizes his arguments:
Throughout the context of these passages Jesus uses judgment language reminiscent of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and the subsequent exile of its inhabitants. Those who were taken away were the ones judged by God whereas those left behind were the remnant who received grace.
Furthermore, the teaching of Jesus confirms this thesis. In the Parable of the Weeds the Son of Man sends his angels to gather out the children of the devil and throw them in the fiery furnace whereas the wheat is left behind (Matt 13:36-43).
The context of Matt 24 and Luke 17 also suggests Jesus is intentionally using judgment and remnant language. Such language naturally brings up images of the former destruction of Jerusalem where the enemy came and “took away” (i.e., killed) those in the city.
Finally, the parallel with Noah and the flood in the preceding verses strongly confirms our thesis. Just as in the days of Noah the people were taken away by the great flood, so those who are not prepared will be taken away when the Son of Man returns.
No comments:
Post a Comment